Firm Performance Scale (Downsizing Context)

What it measures

Five-item manager-rated scale measuring a firm’s market and financial performance relative to competitors following a downsizing initiative. Covers revenue, profit, market share, market position, and growth achievement. Uses a centred (−3 to +3) response format rather than a standard Likert scale. Adapted from Narver and Slater (1990) for the post-downsizing performance context. Validated against objective financial data.

Response format

7-point scale (−3 = clearly worse, 0 = competition level, +3 = clearly better; relative to competitors after the downsizing)

Scale items

• After the downsizing, how has your business unit performed relative to your competitors with respect to achieving the desired revenue level?
• After the downsizing, how has your business unit performed relative to your competitors with respect to achieving the desired profit level?
• After the downsizing, how has your business unit performed relative to your competitors with respect to achieving/securing the desired market share?
• After the downsizing, how has your business unit performed relative to your competitors with respect to achieving/securing the desired market position?
• After the downsizing, how has your business unit performed relative to your competitors with respect to achieving the desired growth?

Full scale items shown. Always cite the original source when using this scale in research.

Usage notes & scoring

Composite reliability = .91; AVE = .67. Validated against objective archival data: r = .79 (revenue) and r = .62 (return on sales), both p < .01. Response format uses −3 to +3 centred scale. Customer uncertainty negatively predicted firm performance (b = –.163, p < .01). Adapted from Narver and Slater (1990).

Recommended companion scales

Citation

Homburg, C., Klarmann, M., & Staritz, S. (2012). Customer uncertainty following downsizing: The effects of extent of downsizing and open communication. Journal of Marketing, 76(3), 112–129.

Keywords